JANPACK SUPPLIERS PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. I.T.O., WARD - 9(3), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 701/KOL/2022Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata09 August 2023AY 2012-20133 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that the CIT(A) had granted several opportunities, but the assessee did not avail them. However, considering the assessee's plea for one more opportunity, the Tribunal decided to remand the case back to the CIT(A).

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal was dismissed ex-parte by the CIT(A) without providing sufficient opportunity for hearing. The assessee argued that the CIT(A) passed an ex-parte order despite a request for adjournment on the last hearing date.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) erred in passing an ex-parte order without granting sufficient opportunity of being heard to the assessee. The issue of treating increase in share capital as undisclosed income under Section 68 was also raised but left open for de novo adjudication.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 68,Section 250

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, KOLKATA BENCH “B”, KOLKATA

Before: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarma]

Hearing: 27.07.2023Pronounced: 09.08.2023

ORDER

Per Sonjoy Sarma, JM:

1.

This appeal of the assessee for the assessment year 2015-16 is directed against the order dated 12.10.2022 passed by the ld. Commissioner of Income-tax, Appeals, NFAC, Delhi [hereinafter referred to as ‘the ‘ld. CIT(A)’]. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal:

i. That the order passed u/s 250 of the ld. CIT(Appeals) confirming the additions and disallowances made by learned assessing officer is contrary to the law and facts of the case. ii. That the ld. CIT(Appeals) erred in law as well as in facts of the case by confirming the addition made by the ld. AO who treated the increase in share capital and premium amounting to Rs. 1,60,00,000/- as undisclosed income u/s 68 of the I.T. Act. iii. That the appellant craves leave to add/or amend any ground of this appeal.

2.

Though the assessee has raised several grounds of appeal by contesting various disallowances and addition made by AO and subsequently sustained by ld. CIT(A) in his order, the ld. counsel for the assessee stated that the ld. CIT(A) has passed an ex-parte order

3. On perusal of the impugned order, we find that the ld. CIT(A) has allowed several opportunities however the assessee did not avail the same. The ld. AR before us prayed that on the last date of hearing a request moved for granting adjournment however the ld. CIT(A) passed the ex-parte order. Therefore, the ld. AR had requested before the bench that one more opportunity be given to the assessee before ld. CIT(A) to present its case on merits by setting aside the appeal to the file of ld. CIT(A).

4. We after hearing the rival submission and perusal of the material available on record, we find that this is a fit case for remanding the appeal to the ld. CIT(A) to give one more opportunity to assessee and we also direct the assessee to cooperate for expeditious disposal of the matter before ld. CIT(A) by not seeking any further adjournment except due to exceptional or unavoidable circumstances. In view of the above discussion, the various grounds raised by the assessee on merits are left open and we remand back the whole issue to the file of ld. CIT(A) for de novo adjudication.

5.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.

More judgments on Section 68

All 29,931 judgments and leading authorities on Section 68 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →